this post was submitted on 17 May 2023
12 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37608 readers
207 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
alyaza@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org
gyrfalcon@beehaw.org
rs5th@beehaw.org
Los@beehaw.org
coldredlight@beehaw.org
SemioticStandard@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@kbin.social
remington@beehaw.org
12
ChatGPT is not ‘artificial intelligence.’ It’s theft. (web.archive.org)
submitted 1 year ago by Troy@beehaw.org to c/technology@beehaw.org
6 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Each of the tokens programs like ChatGPT are trained on and informed by represents a tiny, tiny piece of material that someone else created. And those authors are not credited for it, paid for it or asked permission for its use. In a sense, these machine-learning bots are actually the most advanced form of a chop shop: They use material without their creators' permission, cut itl into parts so small that no one can trace them and then repurpose them to form new products.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Troy@beehaw.org 6 points 1 year ago

But I'm also allowed to want what I want too, which is why I won't be joining team ban-computational-modeling

Absolutely. And I am absolutely joining the team 'computational modeling', too. I don't reject this. What I say is that we might need different economic and legal models making sure that everyone can take advantage of this new tech rather than just a few.

To give a an example: If a tech company uses billions of data for free to train its model on but then claims the copyright for the result, it would certainly increase inequality. For example, a lot of photographers or writers wouldn't earn much money anymore, as their work could just be 'created' by some AI.

So I don't join the 'ban-computational-modeling' team, I just want to see that it is a technology for everyone. Otherwise we will see just a few more tech billionaires while the mass of people is paying the bill as it happened so often in human history.